Rambose Property (Pty) Ltd t.a Sekgala Group v Government Employees Pension Fund (14908/16) [2017] ZAGPPHC 975 (22 December 2017)

Rambose Property (Pty) Ltd t.a Sekgala Group v Government Employees Pension Fund (14908/16) [2017] ZAGPPHC 975 (22 December 2017)

The court found that the respondent was the owner of the property and therefore had locus standi to bring the eviction application. The issues raised by the applicant in the grounds of appeal had already been addressed in the original judgment. The applicant's absence without explanation indicated an election not to pursue the matter further. The court concluded that no other court would come to a different conclusion and dismissed the application for leave to appeal with costs.

Citation
[2017] ZAGPPHC 975
Parties
Applicant: Rambose Property (Pty) Ltd t.a Sekgala Group; Respondent: Government Employees Pension Fund
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
22 December 2017
Case Number
14908/16
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Eviction Judgment
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Tlhapi W
Legal Topics
Eviction, Locus Standi, Ownership of Property
Land and Property Civil Procedure Eviction Locus Standi Ownership of Property

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rambose Property (Pty) Ltd t.a Sekgala Group

Applicant

Government Employees Pension Fund

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Eviction Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has grounds for leave to appeal the eviction judgment.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent has locus standi to bring the eviction application.
  3. 3 Whether the property ownership was correctly determined.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondent was the owner of the property and therefore had locus standi to bring the eviction application. The issues raised by the applicant in the grounds of appeal had already been addressed in the original judgment. The applicant's absence without explanation indicated an election not to pursue the matter further. The court concluded that no other court would come to a different conclusion and dismissed the application for leave to appeal with costs.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.